Uploaded by

Description:

Inclusion of people with disabilities into everyday activities involves practices and policies designed to identify
and remove barriers such as physical, communication and attitudinal that hamper individuals’ ability to empower in
society, the same as people without disabilities. In this context, this study has clearly brought out the strong linkages
between poverty and disability.

Available Formats

Uploaded by

Description:

Inclusion of people with disabilities into everyday activities involves practices and policies designed to identify
and remove barriers such as physical, communication and attitudinal that hamper individuals’ ability to empower in
society, the same as people without disabilities. In this context, this study has clearly brought out the strong linkages
between poverty and disability.

INCLUSIVE STRATEGIES TO EMPOWER THE PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED

Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

Received: 01 Jun 2019 Accepted: 10 Jun 2019 Published: 28 Jun 2019

ABSTRACT

Inclusion of people with disabilities into everyday activities involves practices and policies designed to identifyand remove barriers such as physical, communication and attitudinal that hamper individuals’ ability to empower insociety, the same as people without disabilities. In this context, this study has clearly brought out the strong linkagesbetween poverty and disability. The study was undertaken by the author also corroborates the same. Thus, increasing thepoverty line criteria for the disabled persons also needs consideration by the planners. The problem of mobility andphysical barriers are the roadblocks for the disabled in accessing facilities, accessing people and accessing information.Mitigating the problem requires resources and attention. The study, based on perceptual responses, corroborates thegeneral feeling that the majority of disabled feel socially excluded and discriminated. The attitudinal barriers are,therefore, the real barriers that need to be crossed over in the first place. Higher inflow of resources to the sector to theschemes and programmes run in the social welfare sector as also through the tenth plan committed component planapproach coupled with capacity building of NGOs for working in the remote rural areas are required to be ensured inorder to materialize the commitment of an inclusive, barrier-free and rights-based society.

KEYWORDS: Inclusive Strategies, Empowerment, Physically Challenged

INTRODUCTION

The physically challenged persons of our country suffer from the social, economic and psychological burden thatneeds to be understood by the policy-makers, Implements and the society in general in the right perspective. Thisdisadvantaged section of our society has to bear additional costs of disability some of which are difficult to compensate.The physical and attitudinal barriers they face and the additional expenditure they have to incur for management of theirdisability are few dimensions of their hardship. When a disabled person is poor, the problems get added to the challengesand costs they face becomes magnified more often than not, to an unmanageable degree. Make an attempt to look atvarious inclusive strategies to empowerment and physically challenge linkage, more particularly, in this context. Tosubstantiate the linkage, which is often discussed in general terms, the researcher gives a brief summary of the researchwork conducted on the basis of primary data collected from the physically challenged persons who, for accessingrehabilitation services, working in public and private sectors, studying in colleges in different parts of the selected threenorth coastal districts of Andhra Pradesh.

According to the World Health Organization (2011), many PWDs do not have equal access to health care,education, and employment opportunities, do not receive the disability-related services that they require, and experience

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

264 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

exclusion from everyday life activities. The World Bank (2017) points out that one-fifth of the estimated global total, orbetween 110 million and 190 million people, experience significant disabilities and they are more vulnerable to negativesocial and economic factors than non-disabled persons. Specifically, the factors include less education, poorer healthoutcomes, low staffing levels, and high poverty rates.

Nurazzura Mohamad Diah (2017) Information and Communication Technology (ICT) skills have become basicrequirements to compete in the labor market. However, persons with disabilities face financial, social and environmentaldifficulties which form barriers to acquiring these skills. Thus, it contributes to the weakening of their competitiveness inthe labor market.

Education is a powerful tool for economic empowerment of people with disabilities. Rifkin and Pridmore (2001)1,support this fact when they stated that information (education) is power; people who lack information lack power and lackchoices about how to improve their lives or to control what happens to them. Through educational programs (either formalor informal), people with disabilities can gain knowledge and skills needed to perform functions, tasks or carry out somesocio-economic activities for personal and community development.

Need and Significance of the Study

Empowerment of persons with disabilities or physically challenged, therefore, refers to giving them a variety ofopportunities to discover themselves, understand their environment, be aware of their rights and take control of their livesand partake in important decisions that lead to their destiny. Experience of earlier studies and publications suggests that themajority of persons with physically challenged are unemployed and often denied employment opportunities even whenthey have met the necessary requirements for jobs. The aim is to explore the possibilities of employment in wide-rangingfields, which are hither to not encouraging for the physically challenged in the era of globalization. Therefore, the proposedstudy is entitled as “Inclusive strategies to empower the physically challenged: a study in north coastal districts of AndhraPradesh”

Objectives

• To study the demographic profile of the physically challenged people in the study area.

• To analyze the differences among various demographic group physically challenged persons in timing, scheduling, setting, presentation and response of inclusive strategies.

Hypothesis

• There is no significant difference among various demographic group physically challenged persons in the timing of inclusive strategy.

• There is no significant difference among various demographic group physically challenged persons in the scheduling of inclusive strategy.

• There is no significant difference among various demographic group physically challenged persons in the setting of inclusive strategies.

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

• There is no significant difference among various demographic group physically challenged persons in the presentation of the inclusive strategy.

• There is no significant difference among various demographic group physically challenged persons in the response to inclusive strategy.

METHODOLOGY

The investigator has studies 150 samples of physically challenged persons from the selected three districts ofNorth Coastal Andhra Pradesh. These sample respondents are physically challenged persons who are employees in publicand private organizations, students, business persons, self-employed, professionals, etc. who are selected on the randomsampling method. The opinions of physically challenged respondents on the inclusive strategies to empowerment havebeen measured with their response to opinion based statement through a pre-designed questionnaire. In the questionnaire,there is 5 dimensions of inclusive strategies of physically challenged empowerment with opinion based questions andstatements along with student demographic characteristics like sex, age, education, caste, occupational status, type ofdisability and limitations of the disability. The inclusive strategies of physically challenged empowerment dimensions aretiming, scheduling, setting, presentation, and response, and each dimension is carrying a number of statements. Thefrequency table was designed to the distribution of respondents by demographic profile and ANOVA test was carried outby SPSS statistical package for analyze the data and test the hypotheses.

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards timing shows that malerespondents’ performance (11.30) is more than female (10.65) but is not at the significant level because the tested t-value1.685 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance based on timing.

The difference among different age-group respondents towards timing shows that the performance of above 21years age group respondents (11.58) are significantly higher than the respondents who are between 16-18 years of age(11.56), between 10-15 years (10.72) and between 19-21 years of age (10.38).The calculated f-value is 2.855 foundsignificant at 5% level because the p-value is 0.039.It shows that there is a significant difference among different age groupphysically challenged respondents in their performance towards timing were above 21 years age-group respondentsperforming better in timing.

The significant difference among different castes physically challenged respondents towards timing shows that theperformance of schedule caste respondents (11.51) is significantly higher than the respondents who are other backwardcaste respondents (11.25), open category (10.95) and schedule tribe respondents (10.70).The calculated f-value is 0.928found not significant because the p-value is 0.429.It shows that there is no significant difference among different castesphysically challenged respondents in their performance towards timing where schedule castes respondents performingbetter in timing.

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Inclusive Strategies To Empower The Physically Challenged 267

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards timing shows that the performance ofgraduate respondents (11.34) is found higher than the respondents who are qualified secondary education and postgraduation and above (11.18) and higher secondary (10.64).The calculated f-value is 0.661 found not significant becausethe p-value is 0.578.It shows that there is no significant difference among different education qualification respondents intheir performance towards timing.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towards timingshows that the performance of students and other occupation respondents (11.43) is found higher than students (11.37),private employee (11.33), government employees (10.90) and business people (10.43).The tested f-value 1.030 is not asignificant value because the p-value is 0.394.It infers that there is no significant difference among different occupationlevels of respondents in their performance towards timing

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards timing shows that theperformance of visually disabled respondents (11.33) is found higher than the physically disabled respondents (11.06) andhearing disabled respondents (10.81).The calculated f-value is 0.427 found not significant because the p-value is 0.653.Itshows that there is no significant difference among different types of disability respondents in their performance towardstiming.

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards scheduling shows that malerespondents’ performance (12.42) is more than female (11.44) but is not at the significant level because the tested t-value

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

268 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

1.848 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance towards scheduling.

The difference among different age-group physically challenged respondents towards schedule shows that theperformance of between 19-21 years age group respondents (13.05) is significantly higher than the respondents who areabove 21 years of age (12.37), between 16-18 years (12.30) and 10-15 years of age (9.84).The calculated f-value is 6.552found significant at 1% level because the p-value is 0.000.It shows that there is no significant difference among differentage group physically challenged respondents in their performance towards scheduling where between 19-21 years age-group respondents performing better in scheduling.

The significant difference among different caste group physically challenged respondents towards schedule showsthat the performance of other backward caste respondents (13.53) is significantly higher than the respondents who areschedule tribe respondents (12.50), open category (12.38) and schedule caste respondents (10.26).The calculated f-value is8.293 found significant at 1% level because the p-value is 0.000.It shows that there is a significant difference amongdifferent caste physically challenged respondents in their performance towards scheduling where other backward casterespondents performing better in scheduling.

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards schedule shows that the performanceof graduate respondents (12.17) is found higher than the respondents who qualified secondary education qualified (12.15),higher secondary (12.08) and post graduation and above (12.03).The calculated f-value is 0.017 found not significantbecause the p-value is 0.997.It shows that there is no significant difference among different education qualificationrespondents in their performance towards scheduling.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towardsschedule shows that the performance of other occupation holders (13.77) is found higher than business people (13.40),private employees (12.27), government employees (10.57) and students (10.53).The tested f-value 8.816 is significantvalue because the p-value is 0.000.It infers that there is a significant difference among different occupation levels ofrespondents in their performance towards scheduling.

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards schedule shows that theperformance of hearing disabled respondents (12.46) is found higher than the visually disabled respondents (12.37) andphysically disabled respondents (11.85).The calculated f-value is 0.601 found not significant because the p-value is0.601.It shows that there is no significant difference among different types of disability respondents in their performancetowards scheduling.

Significant at 1% level, Significant at 5% level.

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards setting shows that malerespondents’ performance (8.80) is more than female (8.50) but is not at the significant level because the tested t-value0.750 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance towards the setting.

The difference among different age-group physically challenged respondents towards setting shows that theperformance of between 16-18 years age group respondents (9.17) is significantly higher than the respondents who arebetween 19-21 years of age (8.69), above 21 years (8.58) and 10-15 years of age (7.64).The calculated f-value is 2.808found significant at 5% level because the p-value is 0.042.It shows that there is a significant difference among different agegroup physically challenged respondents in their performance towards setting were between 16-18 years age-grouprespondents performing better in the setting.

The significant difference among different caste group physically challenged respondents towards setting showsthat the performance of other backward caste respondents (9.69) is significantly higher than the respondents who areschedule tribe respondents (9.03), open category (8.51) and schedule caste respondents (7.77).The calculated f-value is4.834 found significant at 1% level because the p-value is 0.003.It shows that there is a significant difference amongdifferent castes physically challenged respondents in their performance towards setting where other backward casterespondents performing better in the setting.

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

270 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards setting shows that the performance ofgraduate respondents (9.20) is found higher than the respondents who qualified secondary education qualified respondents(9.09), higher secondary (8.56) and post graduation and above (8.00).The calculated f-value is 2.285 found not significantbecause the p-value is 0.081.It shows that there is no significant difference among different education qualificationrespondents in their performance towards the setting.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towards settingshows that the performance of students (9.60) is found higher than private employees (9.23), government employees (8.57)and business people (8.17) and other occupation respondents (7.97).The tested f-value 2.909 found significant at 5% levelbecause the p-value is 0.024.It infers that there is a significant difference among different occupation levels of respondentsin their performance towards the setting.

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards setting shows that theperformance of physical and hearing disabled respondents (8.73) is found higher than the visually disabled respondents(8.65).The calculated f-value is 0.017 found not significant because the p-value is 0.983.It shows that there is no significantdifference among different types of disability respondents in their performance towards the setting.

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards presentation shows that malerespondents’ performance (18.83) is more than male (18.27) but it is not at the significant level because the tested t-value0.703 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance towards presentation.

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Inclusive Strategies To Empower The Physically Challenged 271

The difference among different age-group physically challenged respondents towards presentation shows that theperformance of between 16-18 years age group respondents (20.06) is significantly higher than the respondents who areabove 21 years of age (19.84), between 19-21 years (19.24) and 10-15 years of age (13.16).The calculated f-value is 18.577found significant at 1% level because the p-value is 0.000.It shows that there is a significant difference among different agegroup physically challenged respondents in their performance towards presentation were above 21 years age-grouprespondents performing better in the presentation.

The significant difference among different caste group physically challenged respondents towards presentationshows that the performance of open category respondents (20.08) is significantly higher than the respondents who areschedule tribe respondents (19.75), other backward castes (18.91) and schedule caste respondents (15.90).The calculated f-value is 7.103 found significant at 1% level because the p-value is 0.000.It shows that there is a significant differenceamong different caste physically challenged respondents in their performance towards presentation where open categoryrespondents performing better in the presentation.

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards presentation shows that theperformance of post graduation and above qualified respondents (19.18) is found higher than the respondents who qualifiedsecondary education (18.76), graduation (18.61) and higher secondary qualified (18.03).The calculated f-value is 0.373found not significant because the p-value is 0.773.It shows that there is no significant difference among different educationqualification respondents in their performance towards presentation.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towardspresentation shows that the performance of students and private employees (20.13) is found higher than students (19.67),government employees (18.30), business people (17.83) and other occupation respondents (17.33).The tested f-value 1.977is not a significant value because the p-value is 0.101.It infers that there is no significant difference among differentoccupation levels of respondents in their performance towards presentation.

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards presentation shows that theperformance of visually disabled respondents (20.63) is found higher than the physically disabled respondents (17.93) andhearing disabled respondents (17.65).The calculated f-value is 5.601 found significant at 1% level because the p-value is0.005.It shows that there is a significant difference among different types of disability respondents in their performancetowards presentation.

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards response shows that malerespondents’ performance (18.30) is more than female (17.42) but is not at the significant level because the tested t-value1.388 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance towards response.

The difference among different age-group physically challenged respondents towards response shows that theperformance of between 19-21 years age group respondents (18.81) is significantly higher than the respondents who arebetween 16-18 years of age (18.33), 10-15 years of age (17.24) and above 21 years (16.26).The calculated f-value is 2.602found significant at 5% level because the p-value is 0.054.It shows that there is no significant difference among differentage group physically challenged respondents in their performance towards response where between 19-21 years age-grouprespondents performing better in response.

The significant difference among different caste group physically challenged respondents towards response showsthat the performance of schedule tribe respondents (18.77) is significantly higher than the respondents who are opencategory respondents (18.26), other backward castes (18.25) and schedule caste respondents (16.82).The calculated f-valueis 2.006 found not significant because the p-value is 0.116.It shows that there is no significant difference among differentcaste physically challenged respondents in their performance towards response where schedule tribe respondentsperforming better in response.

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards response shows that the performanceof higher secondary qualified respondents (18.47) is found higher than the respondents who qualified post graduation and

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Inclusive Strategies To Empower The Physically Challenged 273

above (18.13), graduation (17.76) and secondary education qualified (17.74).The calculated f-value is 0.315 found notsignificant because the p-value is 0.815.It shows that there is no significant difference among different educationqualification respondents in their performance towards response.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towardsresponse shows that the performance of students and government employees (19.13) is found higher than the student(18.37), business people (17.73), government employees (17.60) and others (17.27).The tested f-value 1.174 is not asignificant value because the p-value is 0.325.It infers that there is no significant difference among different occupationlevels of respondents in their performance towards response.

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards response shows that theperformance of physically disabled respondents (18.16) is found higher than the hearing disabled respondents (18.00) andvisually disabled respondents (17.77).The calculated f-value is 0.153 found not significant because the p-value is 0.858.Itshows that there is no significant difference among different types of disability respondents in their performance towardsresponse.

The difference between male and female physically challenged respondents towards career aspirations shows thatfemale respondents’ performance (19.48) is more than male (19.12) but is not at the significant level because the tested t-value 0.559 is not a significant value. It infers that there is no significant difference between male and female physicallychallenged persons in their performance towards career aspirations.

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

274 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

The difference among different age-group physically challenged respondents towards career aspirations showsthat the performance of between 10-15 years age group respondents (19.96) is significantly higher than the respondentswho are between 19-21 years of age (19.62), between 16-18 years (19.14) and above 21 years of age (17.74).Thecalculated f-value is 1.426 found not significant because the p-value is 0.238.It shows that there is no significant differenceamong different age group physically challenged respondents in their performance towards career aspirations whereasbetween 10-15 years age-group respondents performing better in career aspirations.

The significant difference among different caste group physically challenged respondents towards careeraspirations shows that the performance of schedule tribe respondents (19.73) is significantly higher than the respondentswho are schedule caste respondents (19.41), other backward castes (19.19) and open category respondents (18.59).Thecalculated f-value is 0.608 found not significant because the p-value is 0.611.It shows that there is no significant differenceamong different caste physically challenged respondents in their performance towards career aspirations where scheduletribe respondents performing better in career aspirations.

The difference among different education qualification respondents towards career aspirations shows that theperformance of higher secondary qualification respondents (19.58) is found higher than the respondents who qualified postgraduation and above (19.36), graduation (19.12) and secondary education qualified (18.85).The calculated f-value is 0.233found not significant because the p-value is 0.873.It shows that there is a significant difference among different educationqualifications of respondents in their performance towards career aspirations.

The significant difference among different occupation levels of physically challenged respondents towards careeraspirations shows that the performance of students and government employees (19.97) is found higher than privateemployees (19.50), business people (18.97) and others (17.77).The tested f-value 1.748 is not a significant value becausethe p-value is 0.143.It infers that there is no significant difference among different occupation levels of respondents in theirperformance towards career aspirations.

The significant difference among different types of disability respondents towards career aspirations shows thatthe performance of physically disabled respondents (19.48) is found higher than the visually disabled respondents (19.09)and hearing disabled respondents (18.69).The calculated f-value is 0.453 found not significant because the p-value is0.637.It shows that there is no significant difference among different types of disability respondents in their performancetowards career aspirations.

MAJOR FINDINGS

• The demographic profile of the respondents from the data denotes that more than sixty percent of the sample physically challenged persons are male where the majority are between 21-30 years in the age group. It is also noticed that more than sixty percent of physically challenged respondents have qualified graduation and above graduation.

• It is noticed that more than fifty percent of the respondents are having a disability by birth and they need extra time to read or write a text because of their disability. However, a major group of respondents need extra time to use specialized equipment or technology, they need sufficient time to complete an assessment.

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Inclusive Strategies To Empower The Physically Challenged 275

• According to the response of physically challenged persons it can be concluded that the majority group enables multiple or frequent breaks in finishing the task, so they need an extension of time to complete any assessment.

• The data revealed that most of the physically challenged persons opined that the total assessment can be completed in smaller sections with additional time and they felt additional time allows them for other adjustments in the work.

• The data infers that forty percent of overall physically challenges persons said always true with the additional time allows the physically challenged to compete for assignment with perfection.

• While the data reveals the physically challenged fatigues easily by the others, nearly fifty percent of respondents agreed for their anxiety may impact on the quality of work.

• It can be concluded from the data that the majority group of physically challenged persons does not need more time to complete any task unless sometimes felt difficulty in maintaining concentration during a length of activity. So they require more time for ongoing feedback which will be possible with medication and other health procedures for their performance of activities

• It is observed from the responses of the physically challenged persons that they need an adjustment to overcome distractions, reduce anxiety and frustration for better results.

• The majority group of physically challenged need multiple steps or stages to finish a complex problem even though they attend regular to school/ college. Still, majority group of respondents felt that with the anxiety levels may impact on the quality of the response to the assignment which starting an assessment with a section that engages the physically challenged.

• A dominated group of physically challenged agreed that they find easier to complete an assignment with a section but they complete any work when choosing a time of the day.

• It is noticed from the response of the physically challenged persons that they need regular medical treatment for their health condition as well as strong areas of interest that need to be capitalized upon.

• Most of the physically challenged overcome distraction by using adjustment at sensory issues to complete the assignments and enable explicit individual scaffolding to be provided in performing their duties.

• There is a need to reduce anxiety and frustration among physically challenged to complete the assignment.

• It can be concluded from the data that most of the respondents opined that always true that sensory or physical needs are impacting on the ability of physically challenged to complete the work because they may engage in behaviors which may distract other individuals.

• A predominant group of respondents said reduce distractions may be possible with physically challenged and they should select a particular location to minimize the concentration of others on their work.

• It is observed from the opinions of the respondents that at everywhere management provides wheelchair access to physically challenged and also proper guidance is needed at the school level to reduce anxiety.

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

276 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

• The data shows that the majority group of respondents are very much positively with support sensory needed by the physically challenged to present an assessment and they should provide support of others to finish the assignment.

• Most of the respondents felt that sometimes there is a need to minimizing anxiety and frustration among physically challenged to present or deliver the assessment. Whereas, it is always true that there is less encouragement from others to assign any work to physically challenged persons.

• The response of the physically challenged shows that scaffold memory, sequencing, directionality, and organizational skills are less in them so highlighting keywords or phrases in directions cannot be done by them.

• More than sixty percent of the physically challenged respondents accepted that they using symbols like arrows or stop signs to remind the student to do something is a difficult task at physically challenged persons. So they need help from others to remain focused on their performance.

• Refocus on physically challenged is needed when there are distractions more explanation is necessary to understand.

• A dominated group of respondents felt more than onetime reading will not give clarity to the physically challenged students, so presented in the format of pictures, symbols or signed can make them understand easily.

• As per the responses it is noticed that using colored highlighting for key words are particular to physically challenged students.

• It is observed that most of the physically challenged students have difficulties in seeing and/ or reading the text which fatigue easily at them as a result of physical, sensory or emotional issues.

• The majority group of respondents agreed that physically challenged face difficult in hearing instructions and follow directions so they need to use alternative communication systems for physically challenged to make them more clear in performing their duties.

• A significant number of respondents opined always true that large print and/ or changes to letter and sentence spacing is needed for challenged persons. They are also felt less text on the page is compulsory.

• Most of the respondents accepted that in order to meet student needs related to physical and sensory barriers that prevent the demonstration of achievement. It is expressed by many respondents that they need proper guidance and encouragement to complete any assignment.

• It can be concluded from the responses of physically challenged that their scribes need word-for-word answer including punctuations, even though they can answer through a translator who translates the verbal response.

• Most of the respondents felt that tools with adaptations, such as pencil grips or hand grips badly need by a physically challenged but they did not accept specialized writing tools which are badly needed by them to write.

• Above fifty percent of the respondents expressed that they need special paper which is used by physically challenged students to present their response and they need special keyboards to type on a typewriter or a computer.

NAAS Rating: 3.10- Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Inclusive Strategies To Empower The Physically Challenged 277

• It is indicated from the data that a dominated group of respondents in all the selected three districts agreed with the statement that a scribe must be provided to each and every physically challenged student and they also need mandatory of speech-to-text software.

• A dominated group of respondents in all the selected three districts agreed that assistive technology is necessary for physically challenged to express their response to an assignment when there are distractions. Forty percent of physically challenged respondents opined that a symbol bank technology is needed to assist them and also expressed that they cannot respond to the assessment without a word bank.

• A predominated group of respondents in all the selected three districts agreed that finger or eye pointing may help the physically challenged to locate the spot. So majority group of respondents felt that a computer or word processor cannot be used by every physically challenged.

• The majority group of respondents in all the selected three districts agreed that communication devices can be utilized by the physically challenged and they felt symbol systems are the part and parcel of the education system to physically challenged student.

• Most of the respondents felt that it is always difficult to understand the response of physically challenged but a talking calculator and Braille machine are very much necessary tools for them.

• It can be noted from the responses of the physically challenged persons that facilities provided by the government to them are good and special care taken by the normal people towards them found average.

• The majority group of respondents has a poor opinion about the cooperation and encouragement given by the surrounding people towards physically challenged.

• A dominated group of respondents opined that grasping the power of physically challenged is poor but their performance of work is good

• Most of the respondents have good opinion about their working skills and performance in relation to educational activities. But they who less interest in learning new things. Still, they have good determination in their carrier aspirations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has clearly brought out the strong linkages between poverty and disability. The study was undertakenby the author also corroborates the same. The three per cent reservation provisions in jobs, in education and in all povertyalleviation schemes are to be implemented in right earnest to ameliorate the conditions of the poor physically and mentallychallenged population. Private sector initiatives in the organized sector coupled with an effective delivery system formaking the concessional facilities available to the poor and disabled persons will help to break the vicious cycle of povertyand disability. Increasing the poverty line criteria for the disabled persons also needs consideration by the planners. Theproblem of mobility and physical barriers are the roadblocks for the disabled in accessing facilities, accessing people andaccessing information. Mitigating the problem requires resources and attention. Equally important is the social exclusionand discrimination that a disabled person faces in life which makes it miserable for him to live in society, not to talk ofgetting equal opportunity and full participation in mainstream activities which is far from real, even today. The study,

Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985 - This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

278 Hanumanthu Lakshmana Rao

based on perceptual responses, corroborates the general feeling that the majority of disabled feel socially excluded anddiscriminated. The attitudinal barriers are, therefore, the real barriers that need to be crossed over in the first place. Higherinflow of resources to the sector to the schemes and programs run in the social welfare sector as also through the tenth plancommitted component plan approach coupled with capacity building of NGOs for working in the remote rural areas arerequired to be ensured in order to materialize the commitment of an inclusive, barrier-free and rights-based society.

REFERENCES

1. Akintaro, M.(2004), “Discrimination in Employment of People with Disabilities”. A paper presented at workshop by Ministry of Labour and Productivity, Abuja.